All armed groups capture or detain individuals in a variety of situations, but it is unclear what legal obligations, if any, non-state groups have when dealing with detainees. Bruce Oswald explores this question and the challenge of getting non-state groups to respect basic detention standards.

Summary

All armed groups capture or detain individuals in a variety of situations, but it is unclear what legal obligations non-state armed groups have when dealing with detainees. The international community should consider: (1) studying the extent to which armed non-state actors are able to adhere to extant international humanitarian law and international human rights law; (2) and develop generic detention principles and guidelines that are specifically relevant for non-state armed groups.

About This Brief

This Peace Brief, based on the author’s research on armed groups in Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and other conflict zones, considers some issues relevant to the development of principles and guidelines governing the treatment of detainees taken by armed groups. Bruce ‘Ossie’ Oswald is an associate professor of law at Melbourne Law School and a Jennings Randolph senior fellow (2012-2013). Ossie’s interest in armed groups stems from his military service in places such as Rwanda, East Timor, Iraq, and Afghanistan. His academic research is focused on international humanitarian law, international human rights law, and post-conflict state-building. Ossie would like to thank Pamela Aall, Vivienne O’Connor and Beth Wellington for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts of this Brief. Ossie is also grateful to Maria Glenna for her research assistance.


Related Publications

Toward a Durable India-Pakistan Peace: A Roadmap through Trade

Toward a Durable India-Pakistan Peace: A Roadmap through Trade

Thursday, June 27, 2024

Despite a three-year long cease-fire along their contested border, trade and civil society engagement between India and Pakistan has dwindled, exacerbating the fragility of their relationship. With recently re-elected governments now in place in both countries, there is a window of opportunity to rekindle trade to bolster their fragile peace, support economic stability in Pakistan, create large markets and high-quality jobs on both sides, and open doors for diplomatic engagement that could eventually lead to progress on more contentious issues.

Type: Analysis

Economics

How Have India’s Neighbors Reacted to Its Election?

How Have India’s Neighbors Reacted to Its Election?

Tuesday, June 25, 2024

Narendra Modi was sworn in on June 9 for his third consecutive term as India’s prime minister. Public polls had predicted a sweeping majority for Modi, so it came as some surprise that his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lost ground with voters and had to rely on coalition partners to form a ruling government. Although India’s elections were fought mainly on domestic policy issues, there were important exceptions and Modi’s electoral setback could have implications for India’s regional and global policies.

Type: Analysis

Global Elections & ConflictGlobal Policy

After India’s Surprising Elections, What’s Next for Modi’s Foreign Policy?

After India’s Surprising Elections, What’s Next for Modi’s Foreign Policy?

Tuesday, June 11, 2024

Widely expected to cruise to a third-straight majority in India’s parliamentary elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) instead lost ground and must now rely on its National Democratic Alliance partners, especially the Janata Dal (United) party and the Telugu Desam Party, to form a coalition government. While the stunning results will have immediate consequences for Modi’s domestic agenda, foreign and national security policies are not top priorities for India’s new parliament. Still, the political changes associated with coalition rule and the BJP’s unanticipated electoral setback could affect India’s international relationships in important ways.

Type: Analysis

Global Elections & ConflictGlobal Policy

What Does Further Expansion Mean for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization?

What Does Further Expansion Mean for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization?

Thursday, May 30, 2024

Last week, foreign ministers from member-states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) gathered in Astana, Kazakhstan. The nine-member SCO — made up of China, India, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan — represents one of the largest regional organizations in the world. And with the SCO’s annual heads-of-state summit slated for early July, the ministers’ meeting offers an important glimpse into the group’s priorities going forward. USIP’s Bates Gill and Carla Freeman examine how regional security made its way to the top of the agenda, China’s evolving role in Central Asia and why SCO expansion has led to frustrations among member states.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

View All Publications